Sunday league DOGSO
- Thread starter spuddy1878
- Start date
I think the only reason he knocks it so far ahead is as a result of the foul challenge coming in.
If that foul doesn't happen he is in control and certain to remain so. The doubt only comes in by virtue of the foul being made and at the point its committed there's an obvious opportunity for a goal to be scored.
Not so sure, as it looks to me like he kicks the ball before the challenge, hence why there is so much doubt whether he or the defender plays the ball. We are all looking at this from replays though, real time that would be an incredibly difficult decision to make.
Although I don't disagree that his touch might not have been so bad had he not been aware of the incoming tackle, I don't think we can decide it's DOGSO based on "he might have taken a better touch". He's already taken the bad touch, playing the ball so far ahead of him that he's unlikely to regain possession, then he's fouled.
Peter Grove
RefChat Addict
No, he clearly does not. As others have said, you probably need to replay it on a bigger screen. Even if he did though, getting the ball does not preclude committing a foul when your careless and/or reckless follow-through takes the player's legs out from under him.
Depends on the exact manner of the "taking out" of the player. If it's SFP, as far as I understand, it should still be a red.
Last edited:
Bit patronising there Peter. As if I don't know that. Besides, on this occasion, I see this as a very fair challenge, if he did indeed win the ball, which he may well not have done.
I'm not saying he might have taken a better touch.
I'm saying, but for the foul, he was in control of the ball so imo that criteria is satisfied.
This is a couple of frames before the touch which shows the foul challenge coming before the touch
I know stills don't give a true story, but as a referee, taking this snapshot, it's one of the clearest DoGSOs you're likely to see.
Assuming I had my glasses on and gave the FT, I'd also be dismissing for DOGSO. Without VAR, I don't want to be the only one there not expecting the red card to be produced
one
RefChat Addict
'Foul tackle coming' is not a foul. It should not be a determination in DOGSO. Nor should be what the attacker may have done if he didn't think he wasn't being fouled. Sending a player off on the assumption of the attacker would have taken a better touch if he didn't think he was being fouled is a slippery slide I don't want to get on. Think about a scenario when foul is coming inside the pen area but contact outside. Would you give a pen?
There is no foul untill there is a foul. And the attacker had already taken a heavy touch before there was a foul.
From this clip enough doubts for gaining control for me. Different angles can give different stories though. But this is the only one we can judge it with.
So when does a foul become a foul? If the challenge is careless, then its careless. It doesn't start out okay and then become careless. At the point this challenge starts the player is already committing the foul because he has initiated what results in a careless challenge (in my opinion of course
)
one
RefChat Addict
It is common convention, it becomes a foul when contact is made. You are over thinking this. Reading too much into the wording of the laws. Think about the example of the in/out penalty area I gave.So when does a foul become a foul? If the challenge is careless, then its careless. It doesn't start out okay and then become careless. At the point this challenge starts the player is already committing the foul because he has initiated what results in a careless challenge (in my opinion of course
If we consider the start of the action (before contact) as the foul.... can of worms, slippery slope, wormhole, etc etc.
Or instead of using that (IMO) very flimsy argument, we can use the point at which the defender trips the attacker (which is after the attacker has played the ball) as the point where the foul occurs.So when does a foul become a foul? If the challenge is careless, then its careless. It doesn't start out okay and then become careless. At the point this challenge starts the player is already committing the foul because he has initiated what results in a careless challenge (in my opinion of course
one
RefChat Addict
That is not what DOGSO offence is. For DOGSO offence the foul has to deny the attacker a goal scoring opportunity (different to saying "if the foul didn't occur, the attacker would have had a goalscoring opportunity"). In either case, that is based on the assumption that anticipation of the foul made the attacker take a heavy touch. That is not an assumption I am willing to send a player off for.
If the foul causes the heavy touch then I would agree then I would agree that you would take that into account and it would become a much more certain DOGSO. But I don't think that happened, the attacker takes the heavy touch before he was fouled. That leaves only one question really, do you think the attacker would have got to the ball before the keeper had he not been fouled. Personally I think there is enough doubt to let the referee go with a caution for SPA, but as I have already said I wouldn't argue with anyone saying red. There will always be situations where there isn't necessarily a right and wrong answer.